The case concerned electrical interference with TV signals caused by the activities of the defendant Electricity Board.
Held: Such interference did not constitute a legal nuisance, because it was interference with a purely recreational facility, as opposed to interference with the health or physical comfort or well-being of the plaintiffs. The court did not exclude the possibility that ability to receive television signals free from interference might one day be recognised as ‘so important a part of an ordinary householder’s enjoyment of his property that such interference should be regarded as a legal nuisance, particularly, perhaps, if such interference affects only one of the available alternative programmes.’
Judges:
Buckley J
Citations:
[1965] Ch 436
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd HL 25-Apr-1997
The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Nuisance
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184134
